SkillAgentSearch skills...

Answering Research Questions

Main orchestration workflow for systematic literature research - search, evaluate, traverse, synthesize

Install / Use

npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills --skill answering-research-questions

Installs into whichever agent you are using.

About this skill
📄

SKILL.md

Installable skill definition

Quality Score

92/100

Category

Automation

Supported Platforms

Universal

Our assessment of Answering Research Questions

Answering Research Questions scores 92/100 on our quality scale, 503rd of 1,657 Automation skills we index (top 31%).

Its SKILL.md is 18 KB long, well organised into 48 sections with 17 code examples: a thorough specification that gives an agent plenty to work with.

With 4,360 GitHub stars, it is one of the more widely adopted skills in the catalogue.

Substance
30/30
Structure
20/20
Description
12/15
Adoption
15/20
Freshness
15/15

Maintenance, license and trust

  • The repository was last updated 3 days ago, so Answering Research Questions is actively maintained.
  • No license is declared. By default that means all rights are reserved: you can read it, but reusing or redistributing it is not clearly permitted. Ask the author before building on it commercially.
  • Its trust signals score 88/100, with 1 caution from licensing, adoption, age or documentation. These come from repository metadata, not a code audit — read the skill file before letting an agent act on it.

Safety scan

No issues found

Our scan of the whole file found no instruction hijacking, hidden characters, credential access, data exfiltration or destructive commands.

Automated pattern scan on 2026-09-27. It catches known dangerous patterns, not every risk — read a skill before letting an agent act on it.

Answering Research Questions compared with similar skills

All 4 of these similar skills score higher than Answering Research Questions; compare them before choosing.

SkillScoreStarsUpdatedFormat
Answering Research Questions (this skill)by brycewang-stanford924.4k3d agoSKILL.md
Agent-Reachby Panniantong10085.6k11d agoCLAUDE.md
rufloby ruvnet10073.3ktodayCLAUDE.md
Scraplingby D4Vinci10083.9ktodayMCP Server
algorithmic-artby anthropics100177.9k4d agoSKILL.md

Frequently asked questions

How do I install Answering Research Questions?
Run npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills --skill "Answering Research Questions". The install tabs above show the steps for each supported agent.
Which AI agents does Answering Research Questions work with?
It is written for Universal, as a SKILL.md file. Other agents that read the same format can often use it too.
Is Answering Research Questions safe to use?
Our scan of the whole file found no instruction hijacking, hidden characters, credential access, data exfiltration or destructive commands. It declares no license and scores 88/100 on trust signals. Skills are instructions an agent will follow, so read the file before installing it and do not approve commands you do not understand.
Is Answering Research Questions still maintained?
The repository was last updated 3 days ago, so Answering Research Questions is actively maintained.

name: Answering Research Questions description: Main orchestration workflow for systematic literature research - search, evaluate, traverse, synthesize when_to_use: When user asks a research question. When user wants to find specific data in literature. When starting comprehensive literature review. When user says "find papers about" or "what is known about". version: 1.0.0

<!-- ╔══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╗ ║ 本文件为开源 Skill 原始文档,收录仅供学习与研究参考 ║ ║ CoPaper.AI 收集整理 | https://copaper.ai ║ ╚══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╝ 来源仓库: https://github.com/kthorn/research-superpower 项目名称: research-superpower 开源协议: MIT License 收录日期: 2026-04-02 声明: 本文件版权归原作者所有。此处收录旨在为社会科学实证研究者 提供 AI Agent Skills 的集中参考。如有侵权,请联系删除。 -->

Answering Research Questions

Overview

Orchestrate the complete research workflow from query to findings.

Core principle: Systematic, trackable, comprehensive. Search → Evaluate → Traverse → Synthesize.

Announce at start: "I'm using the Answering Research Questions skill to find [specific data] about [topic]."

The Process

Phase 1: Parse Query

Extract from user's request:

Keywords:

  • Main concepts (e.g., "BTK inhibitor", "selectivity")
  • Synonyms and alternatives (e.g., "Bruton tyrosine kinase")
  • Related terms (e.g., "off-target", "kinase panel")

Data types needed:

  • Specific measurements (IC50, KD, EC50, etc.)
  • Methods or protocols
  • Structures or sequences
  • Results or conclusions

Constraints:

  • Date ranges
  • Specific compounds/targets
  • Organisms or systems
  • Publication types

Ask clarifying questions if needed:

  • "Are you looking for in vitro or in vivo data?"
  • "Any specific time frame?"
  • "Which kinases are you most interested in?"
  • "What email address should I use for Unpaywall API requests?" (Required for finding open access papers)

Phase 2: Initialize Research Session

Propose folder name:

research-sessions/YYYY-MM-DD-brief-description/

Example: research-sessions/2025-10-11-btk-inhibitor-selectivity/

Show proposal to user:

📁 Creating research folder: research-sessions/2025-10-11-btk-inhibitor-selectivity/
   Proceed? (y/n)

Create folder structure:

mkdir -p "research-sessions/YYYY-MM-DD-description"/{papers,citations}

Initialize files:

Core files (always create these):

papers-reviewed.json:

{}

citations/citation-graph.json:

{}

SUMMARY.md:

# Research Query: [User's question]

**Started:** YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM
**Keywords:** keyword1, keyword2, keyword3
**Data types sought:** IC50 values, selectivity data, synthesis methods

---

## Highly Relevant Papers (Score ≥ 8)

Papers scored using `evaluating-paper-relevance` skill:
- Score 0-10 based on: Keywords (0-3) + Data type (0-4) + Specificity (0-3)
- Score ≥ 8: Highly relevant with significant data
- Score 7: Relevant with useful data
- Score 5-6: Possibly relevant
- Score < 5: Not relevant

(Papers will be added here as found)

Example format:
### [Paper Title](https://doi.org/10.1234/example)
**DOI:** [10.1234/example](https://doi.org/10.1234/example) | **PMID:** [12345678](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12345678/)

---

## Relevant Papers (Score 7)

(Papers will be added here as found)

---

## Possibly Relevant Papers (Score 5-6)

(Noted for potential follow-up)

---

## Search Progress

- Initial PubMed search: X results
- Papers reviewed: Y
- Papers with relevant data: Z
- Citations followed: N

---

## Key Findings

(Synthesized findings will be added as research progresses)

CRITICAL: Always use clickable markdown links for DOIs and PMIDs

Auxiliary files (for large searches >100 papers):

See evaluating-paper-relevance skill for guidance on when to create:

  • README.md - Project overview, methodology, file inventory
  • TOP_PRIORITY_PAPERS.md - Curated priority list organized by tier
  • evaluated-papers.json - Rich structured data for programmatic access

For small searches (<50 papers), stick to core files only. For large searches (>100 papers), auxiliary files add significant organizational value.

Phase 3: Search Literature

Use searching-literature skill:

  1. Construct PubMed query from keywords
  2. Execute search (start with 100 results)
  3. Save results to initial-search-results.json
  4. Report: "🔎 Found N papers matching query"

Phase 4: Evaluate Papers

Use evaluating-paper-relevance skill:

For each paper:

  1. Check papers-reviewed.json (skip if already processed)
  2. Stage 1: Score abstract (0-10)
  3. If score ≥ 7: Stage 2 deep dive
  4. Extract findings to SUMMARY.md
  5. Download PDF and supplementary if available
  6. Update papers-reviewed.json (for ALL papers, even low-scoring ones)
  7. If score ≥ 7: proceed to Phase 5 for this paper

CRITICAL: Add every paper to papers-reviewed.json regardless of score. This prevents re-review and tracks complete search history.

Report progress for EVERY paper:

📄 [15/100] Screening: "Paper Title"
   Abstract score: 8 → Fetching full text...
   ✓ Found IC50 data for 8 compounds
   → Added to SUMMARY.md

📄 [16/100] Screening: "Another Paper"
   Abstract score: 3 → Skipping (not relevant)

📄 [17/100] Screening: "Third Paper"
   Abstract score: 7 → Relevant, adding to queue...

Every 10 papers, give summary update

Phase 5: Traverse Citations

Use traversing-citations skill:

For papers scoring ≥ 7:

  1. Get references (backward)
  2. Get citations (forward)
  3. Filter for relevance (score ≥ 5)
  4. Add to processing queue
  5. Evaluate queued papers (return to Phase 4)

Report progress:

🔗 Following citations from highly relevant paper
   → Found 12 relevant references
   → Found 8 relevant citing papers
   → Adding 20 papers to queue

Phase 6: Checkpoint

Check after:

  • Every 50 papers reviewed
  • Every 5 minutes of processing
  • Queue exhausted

Ask user:

⏸️  Checkpoint: Reviewed 50 papers, found 12 relevant
    Papers with data: 7
    Continue searching? (y/n/summary)

Options:

  • y - Continue processing
  • n - Stop and finalize
  • summary - Show current findings, then decide

Phase 7: Synthesize Findings

When stopping (user says no or queue empty):

Option A: Manual synthesis (small research sessions)

  1. Review SUMMARY.md - Organize by relevance and topic
  2. Extract key findings - Group by data type
  3. Add synthesis section:
## Key Findings Summary

### IC50 Values for BTK Inhibitors
- Compound A: 12 nM (Smith et al., 2023)
- Compound B: 45 nM (Doe et al., 2024)
- [More compounds...]

### Selectivity Data
- Compound A shows >80-fold selectivity vs other kinases
- Tested against panel of 50 kinases (Jones et al., 2023)

### Synthesis Methods
- Lead compounds synthesized via [method]
- Yields: 30-45%
- Full protocols in [papers]

### Gaps Identified
- No data on selectivity vs [specific kinase]
- Limited in vivo data
- Few papers on resistance mechanisms
  1. Update search progress stats
  2. List all files downloaded

Option B: Script-based synthesis (large research sessions >50 papers)

For large research sessions, consider creating a synthesis script:

create generate_summary.py:

  • Read evaluated-papers.json from helper scripts
  • Aggregate findings by priority and scaffold type
  • Generate comprehensive SUMMARY.md with:
    • Executive summary with statistics
    • Papers grouped by relevance score
    • Priority recommendations for next steps
    • Methodology documentation
  • Include timestamps and reproducibility info

Benefits:

  • Consistent formatting across sessions
  • Easy to regenerate as more papers added
  • Can customize grouping/filtering logic
  • Documents complete methodology

Final report:

✅ Research complete!

📊 Summary:
   - Papers reviewed: 127
   - Relevant papers: 18
   - Highly relevant: 7
   - Data extracted: IC50 values for 45 compounds, selectivity data, synthesis methods

📁 All findings in: research-sessions/2025-10-11-btk-inhibitor-selectivity/
   - SUMMARY.md (organized findings)
   - papers/ (14 PDFs + supplementary data)
   - papers-reviewed.json (complete tracking)

Phase 8: Final Consolidation

CRITICAL: Always consolidate findings at the end

1. Create relevant-papers.json

Filter papers-reviewed.json to extract only relevant papers (score ≥ 7):

# Read papers-reviewed.json
with open('papers-reviewed.json') as f:
    all_papers = json.load(f)

# Filter for relevant papers (score >= 7)
relevant_papers = {
    doi: data for doi, data in all_papers.items()
    if data.get('score', 0) >= 7
}

# Save to relevant-papers.json
with open('relevant-papers.json', 'w') as f:
    json.dump(relevant_papers, f, indent=2)

Format:

{
  "10.1234/example1.2023": {
    "pmid": "12345678",
    "title": "Paper title",
    "status": "highly_relevant",
    "score": 9,
    "source": "pubmed_search",
    "timestamp": "2025-10-11T16:00:00Z",
    "found_data": ["IC50 values", "synthesis methods"],
    "chembl_id": "CHEMBL1234567"
  },
  "10.1234/example2.2023": {
    "pmid": "23456789",
    "title": "Another paper",
    "status": "relevant",
    "score": 7,
    "source": "forward_citation",
    "timestamp": "2025-10-11T16:15:00Z",
    "found_data": ["MIC data"]
  }
}

2. Enhance SUMMARY.md with Methodology Section

Add these sections to the TOP of existing SUMMARY.md (before paper listings):

# Research Query: [User's question]

**Date:** 2025-10-11
**Duration:** 2h 15m
**Status:** Complete

---

## Search Strategy

**Keywords:** BTK, Bruton tyrosine kinase, inhibitor, selectivity, off-target, kinase panel, IC50
**Data types sought:** IC50 values, selectivity data, kinase panel screening
**Constraints:** None (open date range)

**PubMed Query:**

("BTK" OR "Bruton tyrosine kinase") AND (inhibitor OR "kinase inhibitor") AND (selectivity OR "off-target")


---

## Screening Methodology

**Rubric:** Abstract scoring (0-10)
- Key terms: +3 pts each (or Keywords 0-3, Data type 0-4, Specificity 0-3 if using old rubric)
- Relevant terms: +1 pt each
- Threshold: ≥7 = relevant

**Sources:**
- Initial PubMed search
- Forward/backward citations via Semantic Scholar

---

## Results Statistics

**Papers Screened:**
- Total reviewed: 127 papers
- Highly relevant (≥8): 12 papers
- Relevant (7): 18 papers
- Possibly relevant (5-6): 23 papers
- Not relevant (<5): 74 papers

**Data Extracted:**
- IC50 values: 45 compounds across 12 papers
- Selectivity data: 8 papers with kinase panel screening
- Full text obtained: 18/30 relevant papers (60%)

**Citation Traversal:**
- Papers with citations followed: 7
- References screened: 45 papers
- Citing papers screened: 38 papers
- Relevant papers found via citations: 8 papers

---

## Key Findings Summary

### IC50 Values for BTK Inhibitors
- Ibrutinib: 0.5 nM (Smith et al., 2023)
- Acalabrutinib: 3 nM (Doe et al., 2024)
- [Additional findings synthesized from papers below]

### Selectivity Patterns
- Most inhibitors show >50-fold selectivity vs other kinases
- Common off-targets: TEC, BMX (other TEC family kinases)

### Gaps Identified
- Limited data on selectivity vs JAK/SYK
- Few papers on resistance mechanisms
- No in vivo selectivity data found

---

## File Inventory

- `SUMMARY.md` - This file (methodology + findings)
- `relevant-papers.json` - 30 relevant papers (score ≥7)
- `papers-reviewed.json` - All 127 papers screened
- `papers/` - 18 PDFs + 5 supplementary files
- `citations/citation-graph.json` - Citation relationships

---

## Reproducibility

**To reproduce:**
1. Use PubMed query above
2. Apply screening rubric (threshold ≥7)
3. Follow citations from highly relevant papers (≥8)
4. Check Unpaywall for paywalled papers

**Software:** Research Superpowers skills v2025-10-11

---

[Existing paper listings follow belo

Truncated for display — read the full file on GitHub.

Related Skills

View on GitHub
GitHub Stars4.4k
CategoryAutomation
Updated3d ago
Forks527

Languages

Stata

Trust signals

88/100

From repository metadata: license, adoption, age and documentation. Not a code audit — see the Safety scan above for what the skill file itself contains.

1 medium